Coronary disease & ACSRandomised controlled trial
Coronary function testing vs angiography alone to guide treatment of angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries: the ILIAS angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) trial
- Randomised controlled trial
Authors' conclusion
Routine CFT during the initial ICA was feasible, safe, and had high diagnostic yield. Implementing a pragmatic CFT protocol combined with a disease-specific treatment protocol significantly improved disease-related quality of life in patients with ANOCA compared with standard care.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA), obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) excluded during clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography255 consented
- Participants
- 153 patients
- Comparison
- Intervention vs Standard care
- Interventionn = 77
- Standard caren = 76reference
- Primary endpoint
- Mean difference in within-subject change in Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score (SAQSS) from baseline
- Follow-up
- 6 months
Primary result
SAQSS
Intervention effect
9.4 units
95% CI 3.9–14.9
P = 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
Vasomotor disorder identified
- Vasomotor disorder identified
- 120 patients (78%)
Safety
Coronary function testing (CFT) procedural adverse events
- All CFT procedures successful without adverse events
- 0
Major adverse cardiac events · 6 months
- No major adverse cardiac events
Original publication
Coronary function testing vs angiography alone to guide treatment of angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries: the ILIAS ANOCA trial. Eur Heart J. Published 12 August 2025. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf580
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it